Sentences with phrase «made ghg emissions»

Man - made GHG emissions are and will continue to increase significantly into the future.

The researchers found that about a quarter of coverage in the four UK tabloids from 2000 through 2006 misrepresented wide scientific agreement that man - made GHG emissions have «very likely» had a role to play in global warming.

Fine, if you would like to suggest an alternative term to describe climate change as caused by man made GHG emissions as opposed to the climate change which has occured in the past for other reasons then I will happily use it.

So Trenberth wants to put the burden of proof on those that believe the null hypothesis is a better explanation of reality than the H1 hypothesis AGWers push, that man - made GHG emissions will cause catastrophic climate change.

No mention that even though the Earth's orbit around the sun and axis inclination are «natural,» that these events are more extreme now due to man - made GHG emissions?

Making an exception here, one thing that the OCO - 2 data «means» is that in about a single year 3 small regions on this planet can add the Equivalent of 63 % of the total annual man - made GHG emissions to the atmosphere in one go!

The extent to which nations make ghg emissions reductions commitments based upon «equity» rather than national interest alone.

Although these co-benefits are often not quantified, monetized, or perhaps even identified by the decision - makers or economic modellers (Jochem and Madlener, 2003), they can still play a crucial role in making GHG emissions mitigation a higher priority.

how much warming will be tolerated, a matter which is implicit but rarely identified when nations make ghg emissions reduction commitments,

That is, although it may be in everyone's interest if the United States encourages others to make ghg emissions reductions commitments, the United States may not refuse to reduce its emissions to its fair share of safe global emissions on the basis that others have not acted.

A central issue of concern in these negotiations is the need of nations to take equity and justice seriously when they make ghg emissions reductions commitments and when considering their responsibility for adaptation, losses and damages in poor vulnerable countries.

Not exact matches

Surprisingly, this is the area in which the greatest impact can be made in reducing GHG emissions.

Also, the model offers companies the possibility of buying others» emissions reductions — now, making sure that such GHG cuts are additional, i.e. would not have happened even without regulation, is tricky, argues the Pembina Institute.

Higher prices give businesses and consumers the incentive to modify energy use and make wise investments to reduce greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions over time.

How else could he argue, as he did recently in a Maclean's opinion piece, that blocking the Trans Mountain pipeline expansion — and along with it, increased GHG emissions from Alberta's oil sands — would jeopardize Canada's climate change plan and make it impossible to meet our emissions reduction target under the UN Paris Agreement?

Its self - starting leadership will be a key factor in stopping deforestation, making forest supply chains sustainable, and cutting GHG emissions from the land sector.

Although red meat made the greatest contribution to GHG emissions, since average intakes are consistent with the Australian dietary guidelines, no change in intake was required to meet dietary recommendations.

The PLA is made by Natureworks and results in 48 percent lower GHG (greenhouse gas) emissions vs. HIPS.

Achieved and made significant progress in natural resource reduction targets including meeting its normalized greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions reduction goal and nearly meeting its energy use reduction target four years ahead of its 2020 deadline.

These resources provide an overview of the greenhouse gas effect, lists the 6 main gases that make up GHG emissions, defines terminology and provides an outlook on world energy supplies.

Agricultural greenhouse gases (GHG) make up 8.1 % of total U.S. GHG emissions.

There are global efforts to reduce the man - made emission of GHG's that likely contribute to global warming by trapping the sun's heat inside the atmosphere, including emission standards and financial penalties on excess emissions.

Even without figuring these surprising methane emissions, I think these fuels may possibly entail greater GHG emissions than they offset — in the manufacture of pesticides, fertilizers, farm equipment; irrigation water & energy to pump it; transporation of bauxite from S. America (harming rainforests) to make farm equipment, ag schools, secretaries, and all the paper work at each stage... the list goes on & on & on.

Efforts to reduce GHGs enough to keep them flat are hardly enough to make much of a difference in the climate, he said, adding that developing nations must make significant investments in wind, solar, and nuclear power or emissions are going to rise in the long term.

It doesn't make sense that, at the same time, governments artificially deflate the cost of coal, oil and gas, the primary cause of GHG emissions.

Activities / Accomplishments: DOT has implemented several strategies in order to reduce Scope 3 GHG Emissions, and some of these strategies include: 1) reducing employee business air travel through technologies such as web conferencing; 2) increasing telework rates through making more employees eligible for telework and / or allowing an increase in total number of days teleworked; and 3) using an employee commuting survey to identify opportunities and strategies for reducing commuter eEmissions, and some of these strategies include: 1) reducing employee business air travel through technologies such as web conferencing; 2) increasing telework rates through making more employees eligible for telework and / or allowing an increase in total number of days teleworked; and 3) using an employee commuting survey to identify opportunities and strategies for reducing commuter emissionsemissions.

Both engines meet California ARB optional Low NOx standards, as well as 2017 EPA greenhouse gas emission (GHG) requirements, making... Read more →

Both engines meet California ARB optional Low NOx standards, as well as 2017 EPA greenhouse gas emission (GHG) requirements, making them some of the cleanest engines available today for truck and bus customers.

Their narrow focus in itself is evidence that they don't know what they are talking about, but making the «Hockey Stick» results the poster boy for economic calamity if we do anything about GHG emissions is strange, is it not?

What we have here is a situation in which MM05 attempts to make a point to discredit climate warming which — even if they were correct — would not affect the indicated existence of human forcing of climate via GHG emissions / land use changes occurring now.

My primary objection to nuclear power is precisely that, completely apart from its very real dangers and toxic pollution, it is not a short - term solution if «short - term solution» is defined as one that can make a significant contribution to reducing GHG emissions in the time frame within which such reductions are needed.

What I am saying is that it makes no sense at all to hand - wave at the effects of uncontrolled volcanic eruptions as «absolute proof» that geoengineering schemes «can work», while promoting a gradual 50 - year phaseout of GHG emissions (which is too slow to have any hope of preventing catastrophic outcomes) as «logical» (whatever that means) and ignoring the multiple studies that show we can easily phase out emissions in a fraction of that time with the proven technologies that are already at hand.

This seems highly unwise, and, as I discussed in a piece on HuffPost about it, «Methane in the Twilight Zone, Episode 2,» * the more that you're planning on doing anything about climate change — i.e., lowering GHG emissions, pulling carbon out of the system through biochar, afforestation, etc — the less sense it makes.

I'd say that technology is not the main barrier to making large immediate reductions in GHG emissions, at least not in the US.

If others took it as seriously as they did, I suspect they could make even tougher goals to cut GHG emissions sooner.

RE # 44 & 45, I hope you're not making the contrarian argument that whatever GHGs humans emit are aborbed into nature, and it is only nature's GHGs that are up there in the atmosphere, or that somehow human emissions are absorbed first, and nature's emissions last.

And the reason those 21st century emissions fail to make much of an impression on global temperature is because the atmospheric levels of GHG begin to decline when our emissions are cut (the cut required depending on the gas in question).

The price differential between hybrids and fossil fuel cars could be removed at a stroke if sales tax levels were set based on a car's GHG emissions per mile, and this would be likely to make a huge difference to take - up of hybrids — again, the problem is not technology, it is simply lack of political will.

Our 2007 work, and the work in our new paper make it clear that without GHG emissions mitigation, there is no sustainable future for polar bears or other ice dependent creatures.

In any case, Oreskes et al. make a strong case for the need of curbing the emission of GHGs.

Stephen Segrest I don't recall you ever providing authoritative references demonstrating that weather - dependent renewables can make a major contribution to cutting global GHG emissions.

The evidence demonstrating that nuclear is the cheapest way to make major cuts to global GHG emissions is overwhelming.

The above examples also make it clear that carbon removal solutions are a complement — not an alternative — to GHG emission reduction strategies.

The fastest way to make deep cuts to GHG emissions is with nuclear power, not weather dependent renewables.

As a result, framing carbon removal as a «third way» between GHG emission reductions and solar geoengineering makes carbon removal appear to be an option in the middle of these approaches, when it is in fact much closer to the mitigation activities that act as the center of gravity in the climate conversation.

Renewablkes can not supply much of the worlds energy so they can not make much contribution to reducing GHG emissions.

Above: the projected emissions gap in 2030 in the UNEP report shows that countries are not planning to make the necessary GHG emissions reductions to avoid overshooting our carbon «budget», meaning that large - scale CDR would be necessary to fill the gap and prevent climate change.

... they caution that society should fully quantify direct and indirect GHG emissions associated with energy alternatives and associated consequences prior to making policy commitments that have long - term effects on global forests; for they ominously warn «there is a substantial risk of sacrificing forest integrity and sustainability for maintaining or even increasing energy production with no guarantee to mitigate climate change.»»

Some GHGs are increasing as a direct result of man - made emissions.

For policy - makers, the speed of climate change over the coming decades matters as much as the total long - term change, since this rate of change will determine whether human societies and natural ecosystems will be able to adapt fast enough to survive.New results indicate a warming rate of about 2.5 C per century over the coming decades (assuming no attempt is made to reduce GHG emissions).